Apple shareholder's meeting scheduled for Feb 28, nine proposals to be voted on

Apple notified the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that it will be holding its annual shareholder meeting at 9 a.m. Pacific on Feb. 28 to discuss proposals from the company's board of directors.

In the SEC filing, Apple notes nine proposals to be discussed and voted upon.

The Apple Board of Directors is recommending that shareholders vote in approval of the election of eight nominees to the board, ratification of Ernst & Young as Apple's public accounting firm, and approval of the proposed executive compensation.

The fourth voting item is a request that shareholders ratify a one-year cycle for votes on executive compensation packages and plans.

The board is recommending that shareholders vote against five proposals by other shareholders, including one regarding diversity among senior management, and four entitled "Charitable Giving - Recipients, Intents and Benefits," "Executive Compensation Reform," "Executives to Retain Significant Stock," and "Shareholder Proxy Access Amendments."

Executive Compensation Reform

The "Executive Compensation Reform" line-item claims that Apple lacks "fair, just and ethical compensation principles" and was filed by Shareholder Jing Zhao. Zhao is the founder of the Comparative Policy Research Institute, a self-proclaimed "independent think tank focusing on comparative social, economical, political, and industrial policy issues" comprised mainly of Chinese researchers, scientists, economists, and engineers with experience in Japan that reside mainly in Silicon Valley.

Publications by Zhao's group include "Prison Memoirs of an Anarchist," "Memoirs of a Revolutionary," "The Anarchist Lesson from the Spanish Civil War," and the "Chinese Anarchist Archives."

Charitable Giving - Recipients, Intents and Benefits

The National Center for Public Policy Research proposed the Charitable Giving edict, requesting that Apple provide an annual report detailing "the company's standards for choosing recipients of company assets in the form of charitable contributions." Also demanded are follow-up reports confirming if contributions are used for stated purposes by the recipients.

Diversity among senior management and the Board of Directors

Proposal 6 before the shareholders is seeking to "increase the diversity of senior management and its board of directors" by implementing an "accelerated recruitment policy" of under-represented groups in Silicon Valley as a while, and Apple as a company.

Apple is requesting shareholders refuse this proposal, as its "holistic view of inclusion and diversity" generates opportunities not just in Apple, but beyond Cupertino as well.

The company also notes that Apple's hiring trends for the last three years are showing steady progress towards a diverse workforce, as requested by the proposal. The same requester proposed something similar in 2016, and received less than 5 percent of the votes cast.

Comments

Increase the diversity of senior management by implementing an accelerated recruitment.

No.

Apple's job is to make sure that excellent candidates are not overlooked because of their race, gender, religious or sexual persuasion. It is not Apple's job to fill seats with unsuitable candidates to meet some arbitrary quota. If the person is good enough then he will know it and will apply.

And whenever I see the phrase 'think tank' I stop reading whatever bilge they're pushing. No one should be paid a salary for thinking in a tank.

Gore should probably get the boot. He's brought nothing to Apple as far as keeping them ahead of the curve in political matters. Apple should've been neutral during the election, in anticipation of it going either way. Now Tim has a tougher go of it trying to play catchup with an administration that is opposed to 90% of Apple's bleeding heart Progressive rubbish.

I absolutely cannot stand this "we need more diversity" rant. The company should always be focused on bringing in the best. Many great companies are colorblind like I am. Let's kick out this crutch and if you can't make it you can't make it. I think they should hire more people from small towns. We don't have as good of an opportunity as people in big cities to work for Apple. Sounds dumb right?

Gore should probably get the boot. He's brought nothing to Apple as far as keeping them ahead of the curve in political matters. Apple should've been neutral during the election, in anticipation of it going either way. Now Tim has a tougher go of it trying to play catchup with an administration that is opposed to 90% of Apple's bleeding heart Progressive rubbish.

Your personal fantasies do not align with reality.First off most of Republican congressmen and senators were against Trump from the get go. You think they'll be playing catch up?Do you also think that every other bleeding heart progressive CEO who was invited to sit down with Trump will also be playing catch up? Fact is they all have to work together, the administration with congress/senate, tech companies etc and they with it. No one's closing the door on any one here.

Gore should probably get the boot. He's brought nothing to Apple as far as keeping them ahead of the curve in political matters. Apple should've been neutral during the election, in anticipation of it going either way. Now Tim has a tougher go of it trying to play catchup with an administration that is opposed to 90% of Apple's bleeding heart Progressive rubbish.

Yeah, stupid human rights and environmental nonsense. Time to catchup with the backwards train to the dark ages.

Increase the diversity of senior management by implementing an accelerated recruitment.

No.

Apple's job is to make sure that excellent candidates are not overlooked because of their race, gender, religious or sexual persuasion. It is not Apple's job to fill seats with unsuitable candidates to meet some arbitrary quota. If the person is good enough then he will know it and will apply.

Your premise is flawed. Nowhere does it state they wish to fill roles with unsuitable candidates. What they're saying is they want to fill roles with people who are equally talented and passionate but who also don't happen to all be white guys. There is value in that, tho I realize many old white guys on the internet don't realize it.

They do this by ensuring they don't overlook qualified candidates based on gender and race. They do this by trying to encourage women and minorities to get involved with technology when young, and by recruiting when older. There are plenty of talented white guys. There are also talented non-white-guys, but Apple may have to look for them. Since diversity offers value, it makes sense to actively look. And then hire the best candidate from the total pool of qualified candidates, which now includes non-white-guys.

Increase the diversity of senior management by implementing an accelerated recruitment.

No.

Apple's job is to make sure that excellent candidates are not overlooked because of their race, gender, religious or sexual persuasion. It is not Apple's job to fill seats with unsuitable candidates to meet some arbitrary quota. If the person is good enough then he will know it and will apply.

Your premise is flawed. Nowhere does it state they wish to fill roles with unsuitable candidates. What they're saying is they want to fill roles with people who are equally talented and passionate but who also don't happen to all be white guys. ... hire the best candidate from the total pool of qualified candidates, which now includes non-white-guys.

All very well and good, except that, much of the discussion on what constitutes 'diversity' in the US -- especially Silicon Valley -- rarely seems to mention non-white guys (and gals) like Indian- and Chinese-Americans...

Increase the diversity of senior management by implementing an accelerated recruitment.

No.

Apple's job is to make sure that excellent candidates are not overlooked because of their race, gender, religious or sexual persuasion. It is not Apple's job to fill seats with unsuitable candidates to meet some arbitrary quota. If the person is good enough then he will know it and will apply.

Your premise is flawed. Nowhere does it state they wish to fill roles with unsuitable candidates. What they're saying is they want to fill roles with people who are equally talented and passionate but who also don't happen to all be white guys. There is value in that, tho I realize many old white guys on the internet don't realize it.

They do this by ensuring they don't overlook qualified candidates based on gender and race. They do this by trying to encourage women and minorities to get involved with technology when young, and by recruiting when older. There are plenty of talented white guys. There are also talented non-white-guys, but Apple may have to look for them. Since diversity offers value, it makes sense to actively look. And then hire the best candidate from the total pool of qualified candidates, which now includes non-white-guys.

By definition, diversity programs are discriminatory because criteria for hiring places race, sex, or whatever above qualifications that do not include race, sex (or other factors). Companies are apt to be sued for any number of things, including discrimination, whether it's imagined or not. What a nightmare to be a CEO of almost any Fortune 500 company.

Increase the diversity of senior management by implementing an accelerated recruitment.

No.

Apple's job is to make sure that excellent candidates are not overlooked because of their race, gender, religious or sexual persuasion. It is not Apple's job to fill seats with unsuitable candidates to meet some arbitrary quota. If the person is good enough then he will know it and will apply.

Your premise is flawed. Nowhere does it state they wish to fill roles with unsuitable candidates. What they're saying is they want to fill roles with people who are equally talented and passionate but who also don't happen to all be white guys. There is value in that, tho I realize many old white guys on the internet don't realize it.

They do this by ensuring they don't overlook qualified candidates based on gender and race. They do this by trying to encourage women and minorities to get involved with technology when young, and by recruiting when older. There are plenty of talented white guys. There are also talented non-white-guys, but Apple may have to look for them. Since diversity offers value, it makes sense to actively look. And then hire the best candidate from the total pool of qualified candidates, which now includes non-white-guys.

It's not flawed at all. The proposal is to increase diversity of senior management. It does not say increase diversity of senior management as long as diverse candidates are available. As I stated, Apple's job isn't to increase diversity; it is to ensure that candidates are not overlooked because of race, religion or sexual persuasion. The result of this may be that your diversity levels remain unchanged because there were no suitable candidates.

Here’s the deal. Any swinging dick activist can buy a few shares of a target company like AAPL. That gives them the right to make shareholder proposals no matter how lunatic fringe they are. I assume there are different procedures for getting those proposals on the ballot. Shareholders then vote, often by proxy, to accept or reject those proposals. Thankfully the board of directors can make recommendations for or against such shareholder proposals and most proxy votes opt to accept the board’s recommendations. Rarely do shareholder proposals pass.

Increase the diversity of senior management by implementing an accelerated recruitment.

No.

Apple's job is to make sure that excellent candidates are not overlooked because of their race, gender, religious or sexual persuasion. It is not Apple's job to fill seats with unsuitable candidates to meet some arbitrary quota. If the person is good enough then he will know it and will apply.

And whenever I see the phrase 'think tank' I stop reading whatever bilge they're pushing. No one should be paid a salary for thinking in a tank.

I would like all members of our armored forces to be reflective individuals.